But you have no measurements for one, which by definition means only one thing is being measured, which was the point you keep missing.

The only factor that could possibly explain an increase in diurnal temperatures (difference between daytime and nighttime temperatures)a few days after a FD is a sudden decrease in Cloud Cover, because Clouds reflect ISR and trap OLR. There's no way around it.

No, there are other factors which could possibly account for both effects. The point is there is NO measured data to support the hypothesis, yet you have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker, so to speak. That would be fine IF you did not turn around and dismiss other data because you do not believe there is sufficient amounts to suit you. You even claimed the existing data must be contaminated because you did not want to believe what it indicated. That is hypocrisy at this point.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

But you have no measurements for one, which by definition means only one thing is being measured, which was the point you keep missing.

The only factor that could possibly explain an increase in diurnal temperatures (difference between daytime and nighttime temperatures)a few days after a FD is a sudden decrease in Cloud Cover, because Clouds reflect ISR and trap OLR. There's no way around it.

The effect of Forbush decrease on DTR is statistically signiﬁcant onlyif the analysis is restricted to high amplitude FDs (above thethreshold value of 7% with the respect to undisturbed CR intensity). The magnitude of the effect on DTR is estimated to be (0.38±0.06)◦C.

So how does this relate to anything very useful in regards to climate change.First it would seem to me that you need to show that the intensity and the frequencies of these events has changed significantly over the last 50 years or so and that there is a correlation to the warming that has taken place.

Secondly a change in DTR does not imply that the climate has warmed or cooled for example a top of 20 Deg C and a low of 10 Deg C implies an average temperature of 15 Deg C as does a low of 12 and a high of 18.

In fact all the DTR proves is just how strong the greenhouse effect really is because despite a considerable reduction in incoming radiation the over night temperatures typically end up higher than those days when there is no cloud.

No, there are other factors which could possibly account for both effects.

No, you are wrong. I have just shown conclusive data above that GCRs have a substantial impact on the DTR range after a FD decrease because of a sudden decrease in Cloud Cover.

Do tell, what factors cause an increase in daytime and a decrease in nighttime temperatures, DAYS after the FD decrease, which is IN THE RANGE of the lag time for the FD to have impacts on Earth's Climate, that is after a FD event which creates a spike so large that it can be observed in the DTR dataset? What FACTORS are these that cause an increase in the DTR range that just so happens to coincide with a FD decrease?

_________________Meteorology Undergraduate

Last edited by Snowy123 on Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

First it would seem to me that you need to show that the intensity and the frequencies of these events has changed significantly over the last 50 years or so and that there is a correlation to the warming that has taken place.

Secondly a change in DTR does not imply that the climate has warmed or cooled for example a top of 20 Deg C and a low of 10 Deg C implies an average temperature of 15 Deg C as does a low of 12 and a high of 18.

In fact all the DTR proves is just how strong the greenhouse effect really is because despite a considerable reduction in incoming radiation the over night temperatures typically end up higher than those days when there is no cloud.

We have measured an increase in ISR reaching Earth's Surface, either from an increase in TSI, or a decrease in Cloud Cover. We also know that GCRs impact Cloud Cover through the Forbush Decrease evidence of the FDs impacting the DTR range significantly.

We know this is a cause and not an effect, because the radiative imbalance measurements from CERES over the last 10 years show that of a radiative forcing from Cloud Cover, and not a radiaitve feedback. The feedback signal is weak compared to the radiative forcing signal from Cloud Cover.

Warmair, I'm using the DTR range as simple evidence TO SHOW Wayne that GCRs have an impact on Cloud Cover. FDs are excellent tests to see if they do, and the evidence is clear that they do.

The GCR hypothesis is on shaky ground because our knowledge of Climate Change Science is on a three legged table, but it is a radiative forcing that we KNOW impacts Cloud Cover, and we KNOW that a radiative forcing from Cloud Cover occurs on a year to year basis.

The DTR effect not only proves the GHE, but it shows that Clouds play a very important role in Climate Change, and we need a comprehensive understanding about the changes in Clouds before we can close the book and say "The Science is Settled."

No, there are other factors which could possibly account for both effects.

No, you are wrong. I have just shown conclusive data above that GCRs have a substantial impact on the DTR range after a FD decrease because of a sudden decrease in Cloud Cover.

No you have done no such thing. You have shown a correlation which in no way is conclusive evidence of causation. The CERN data clearly showed the impact on cloud formation was insufficient to make such a change.

Quote:

Do tell, what factors cause an increase in daytime and a decrease in nighttime temperatures, DAYS after the FD decrease, which is IN THE RANGE of the lag time for the FD to have impacts on Earth's Climate, that is after a FD event which creates a spike so large that it can be observed in the DTR dataset? What FACTORS are these that cause an increase in the DTR range that just so happens to coincide with a FD decrease?

A martian cloud ray cannon hidden in a series of satellites around the planet will do just that.The evidence of the cannon is just as compelling as the evidence for your favorite hypothesis. The cannon causes both impacts each time they are fired, thus the correlation. You see the same cause can trigger both events without either being a cause for the other.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

A martian cloud ray cannon hidden in a series of satellites around the planet will do just that.The evidence of the cannon is just as compelling as the evidence for your favorite hypothesis. The cannon causes both impacts each time they are fired, thus the correlation. You see the same cause can trigger both events without either being a cause for the other.

You haven't answered my question.

What other factor besides decreasing Cloud Cover will cause the DTR to go up right after a Forbush Decrease?

A martian cloud ray cannon hidden in a series of satellites around the planet will do just that.The evidence of the cannon is just as compelling as the evidence for your favorite hypothesis. The cannon causes both impacts each time they are fired, thus the correlation. You see the same cause can trigger both events without either being a cause for the other.

You haven't answered my question.

What other factor besides decreasing Cloud Cover will cause the DTR to go up right after a Forbush Decrease?

Yes, I did. A martian cloud ray cannon, which impacts both the DTR and Cloud Cover. The correlation between the two is what you have seen, but cannot measure.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Well, it doesn't appear it will be cooling any time soon, does it?"Start of 2012, March shatter US heat records

By SETH BORENSTEIN AP Science Writer The Associated Press

Monday, April 9, 2012 11:44 AM EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) — It has been so warm in the United States this year, especially in March, that national records were not just broken, they were deep-fried.

Temperatures in the lower 48 states were 8.6 degrees (4.8 degrees Celsius) above normal for March and 6 degrees (3.3 degrees Celsius) higher than average for the first three months of the year, according to calculations by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That far exceeds the old records.

The magnitude of how unusual the year has been in the U.S. has alarmed some meteorologists who have warned about global warming. One climate scientist said it is the weather equivalent of a baseball player on steroids, with old records obliterated.

"Everybody has this uneasy feeling. This is weird. This is not good," said Jerry Meehl, a climate scientist who specializes in extreme weather at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. "It's a guilty pleasure. You're out enjoying this nice March weather, but you know it's not a good thing."

It's not just March.

"It's been ongoing for several months," said Jake Crouch, a climate scientist at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C."I have been starting my planting a 5 weeks earlier than normal. I anticipated AGW's effects and moved to this elevation in 1997. It was either that or move to mosquitoland--Canada!

Line plot of global mean land-ocean temperature index, 1880 to present, with the base period 1951-1980. The black line is the annual mean and the red line is the five-year running mean. The green bars show uncertainty estimates. Graph by NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Click to enlarge.

In 1872 the HMS Challenger pulled out from Portsmouth, England to begin an unprecedented scientific expedition of the world's oceans. During its over three year journey the HMS Challenger not only collected thousands of new species and sounded unknown ocean depths, but also took hundreds of temperature readings—data which is now proving invaluable to our understanding of climate change.

Utilizing the temperature data from the HMS Challenger expedition and comparing it to contemporary temperatures, researchers writing in Nature Climate Change found that the oceans' surface— where marine warming is most intense—saw temperature rise on average by 0.59 degrees Celsius (1.1 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 135 years or so. This implies that oceanic temperatures have been rising for at least a century.

"The significance of the study is not only that we see a temperature difference that indicates warming on a global scale, but that the magnitude of the temperature change since the 1870s is twice that observed over the past 50 years," explains lead author Dean Roemmich, University of California San Diego physical oceanographer. "This implies that the time scale for the warming of the ocean is not just the last 50 years but at least the last 100 years."

Prior research has shown that 90 percent of the heat added to the atmosphere has ended up in the oceans, at least since the 1960s. Roemmich told LiveScience that this implies, "the ocean temperature is probably the most direct measure we have of the energy imbalance of the whole climate system."

While the HMS Challenger took temperatures at over 300 stations with mercury, pressure, and resistance thermometers, today some 3,500 free-floating Argo robotic probes roll through the seas gathering temperature data.

Temperatures globally, including both land and sea, have risen about 0.8 degrees Celsius (1.44 degrees Fahrenheit) since the first decade of the 1900s. The rate of warmth has doubled since 1950. Scientists overwhelmingly agree that climate change is occurring due to greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels.

CITATION: Dean Roemmich, W. John Gould, John Gilson. 135 years of global ocean warming between the Challenger expedition and the Argo Programme. Nature Climate Change, 2012.

(03/28/2012) As North America recovers from what noted meteorologist Jeff Masters has called "the most incredible spring heatwave in U.S. and Canadian recorded history," a new paper argues that climate change is playing an important role in a world that appears increasingly pummeled by extreme weather. Published in Nature Climate Change, the paper surveys recent studies of climate change and extreme weather and finds "strong evidence" of a link between a warming world and the frequency and intensity of droughts, floods, and heatwaves—such as the one that turned winter into summer in the U.S.

NASA image shows decline in maximum sea ice extent

(03/28/2012) Data released by the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) shows that Arctic sea ice for the winter of 2011-2012 reached its maximum extent on March 18 at 15.24 million square kilometers (5.88 million square miles). The mark is well below the 1979–2000 average, but was above the record low of the 2010–2011 winter.

NASA image: records shattered across U.S. as summer arrives before spring

(03/22/2012) Central U.S. and parts of Canada have seen over a thousand record temperatures shattered over the past week and a half, as an abnormally-long and bizarrely-hot warm spell moves across portions of North America. The direct cause of the weird weather is a blocked high pressure system, but as the U.S. experiences what may be the warmest March on record, meteorologists say climate change may be playing a role in the severity of the heatwave.

2010, not 1998, warmest year on record

(03/20/2012) An updated temperature analysis by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit has confirmed that 2010, not 1998, was the warmest year since record keeping began in the late 19th Century. The new analysis adds in temperature data from 400 stations across northern Canada, Russia, and the Arctic, which had been left out of the previous analysis.

Climate change could increase fires, logging, and hunting in rainforests

(03/13/2012) The combined impacts of deforestation and climate change will bring a host of new troubles for the world's tropical rainforests argues a new study in Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Drying rainforests due to climate change could lead to previously inaccessible forests falling to loggers, burning in unprecedented fires, or being overexploited by hunters.

Arctic warms to highest level yet as researchers fear tipping points

(02/13/2012) Last year the Arctic, which is warming faster than anywhere else on Earth due to global climate change, experienced its warmest twelve months yet. According to recent data by NASA, average Arctic temperatures in 2011 were 2.28 degrees Celsius (4.1 degrees Fahrenheit) above those recorded from 1951-1980. As the Arctic warms, imperiling its biodiversity and indigenous people, researchers are increasingly concerned that the region will hit climatic tipping points that could severely impact the rest of the world. A recent commentary in Nature Climate Change highlighted a number of tipping points that keep scientists awake at night.

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

its a very interesting article that the someone creates a misunderstanding that the weather in a local region of the globe to try the global warming has been stopped so that my thinking is that the its running cool and the warm anomalies in the Kara sea.thanks